Put Ymir, Katua, Paola, Arran, and Samson back on the list

<Mekkah> rody seriously already removed units from the tier list?<Vykan12> Just delete it as a failed experiment<Mekkah> lol<SevenDeadlySins> yes mekkah<SevenDeadlySins> without talking to anyone or writing anything up<Cheetah7071> yeah, that was stupid<Vykan12> wtf<Cheetah7071> even if warpskipping is assumed<Cheetah7071> they should just be auto-bottom<SevenDeadlySins> he completely deleted ymir, aran, samson, catria, and paola<Cheetah7071> not deleted<SevenDeadlySins> automaticall<Vykan12> "Unit x doesn't exist" is being taken way too seriously<SevenDeadlySins> they DO NOT EXIST<Vykan12> Nobody's removing Stefan from FE9 lists<Vykan12> IIRC<Vykan12> That costs you turns no matter how you play the chapter<Vykan12> so fuck that when doing max efficiency<Mekkah> let's remove Naesala and Tibarn because they're not getting recruited with Giffca existing<Vykan12> rofl<SevenDeadlySins> in any case<Vykan12> That would remove Cyas too<SevenDeadlySins> i really think there's no reason not to do dual concurrent tier lists<SevenDeadlySins> one with warp and one without<Vykan12> And imagine the havoc it would wreak on the FE4 gen 2 list<Mekkah> hannibal who?<Cheetah7071> who isn't being recruited in FE4?<Cheetah7071> oh<Cheetah7071> hannibal?<SevenDeadlySins> also<Mekkah> also<Mekkah> if you go fast enough in ch9<Mekkah> you dont get altenna<Vykan12> There's more than 1 pairing per child?<Mekkah> x)<SevenDeadlySins> don't forget all the replacements<SevenDeadlySins> like<Cheetah7071> he doesn't slow things down, since corplol can wander back to recruit him while others press ahead<SevenDeadlySins> hawk and femina<SevenDeadlySins> "what"<Mekkah> you need to clear enemies for corple to talk to hannibal<SevenDeadlySins> also he may not slow things down but he sure as shit is a pain in the ass<Cheetah7071> so?<SevenDeadlySins> i ended up sleeping him with patty's sleep sword<Mekkah> and you need to recruit or kill or seize hannibal to advance to the next castle<Mekkah> (seize as in seize his castle, which the game considers the same as killing him)<Cheetah7071> that's an entirely different argument fromt he one being used to remove catria et al<Cheetah7071> it's not analogous at all<SevenDeadlySins> it's analogous to stefan<Mekkah> it saves like 20 turns to kill hannibal when you meet him<SevenDeadlySins> "recruiting hannibal costs turns"<SevenDeadlySins> if you don't kill him<SevenDeadlySins> he goes and gets reinforcements<SevenDeadlySins> which threaten your base castle<SevenDeadlySins> or flank you from the back<Cheetah7071> see this is why a unit's recruitment conditions should never count against them<Mekkah> <int> aran's main use is providing one of my units with 33 exp<Vykan12> But that contradicts the PP concept <Vykan12> lolol<Vykan12> Aran is so easy to recruit on turn 2<Mekkah> but ok seriousl<Mekkah> xavier..<SevenDeadlySins> in any case<SevenDeadlySins> "why not do a double list"

Bottom line, you don't count a character's recruitment requirements against them, and even if you did, the notion of removing playable characters from a tier list is absurd. Now I'm not clear on what exact tiering system is employed here, but as far as I can tell, if you do count recruitment against someone, it's simply a negative factor they have to overcome. If they don't, that will be reflected in whatever their crappy ranking is (presumably lower mid to bottom).

Well in this case, it's a completely insurmountable obstacle for the units in question. Even if they joined automatically they would still be incapable of doing anything before the game was over, and it would still be very difficult or impossible to work out some way of actually tiering them (other than to just throw them in bottom). Notice that no one said Palla or Catria couldn't be recruited, but they were still among the ones removed from the list; it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with recruitment costs.

"All bottom tier with no chance of redemption, case closed" is not much different from not existing, in both cases there is nothing to discuss about the unit and they have no effect on gameplay or turncount. So I can't say that I disagree with FE3's decision there.

Although I do agree maybe he should've said something first. Speaking of which, this leads me to question why tier lists get to be under the authority of whoever happens to create the tier list topic. I don't like the idea of just arbitrarily giving one person more power over the list than others, and this is an example of why.